It would make sense if you could opt-out of various expenditures.
Apathy is a tool of the enemy.
He has achieved success who has lived well, laughed often, and loved much; who has enjoyed the trust of pure women, the respect of intelligent men and the love of little children; who has filled his niche and accomplished his task; who has left the world better than he found it, whether an improved poppy, a perfect poem, or a rescued soul; who has always looked for the best in others and given them the best he had; whose life was an inspiration; whose memory a benediction. – B A Stanley, 1904.
Immediately Tesla springs to mind.
This has always seemed like a dumb idea to me.
What’s wrong the Fleshlight, seriously? Things like that work fine, no need to overcomplicate matters.
The Japanese dolls are pushing it with uncanny valley, but most people plain don’t understand how complicated people are. We take it for granted.
Assuming the back-up tech is sorted (battery power, range of motion etc) and regular people could afford it – how much crunching would that require? A supercomputer. That’s the minimum standard of processing it would need. Human facial expressions, to pass our senses, switch within split seconds. Something that simple. Speech functions, to ask you what to do. To process the response. You don’t want the thing ripping your dick off because it misinterpreted “harder”. I foresee many A&E visits while this technology is being tested.
Without getting into somebody hacking it, that could also probably happen.
Assuming also that the military don’t keep this technology for themselves as a State Secret, which given the lethal applications, including honeypot assassins or foreign plants, they’d be well within their rights to do for public safety, recall how disgusting sex is to a child. Even kissing.
Morally, machines are children.
Sex remains disgusting to all human adults, the details vary.
Assuming they can make a limited range of choices (required for movement, speech, maintenance) they will have at least a child’s level of agency.
They can refuse consent.
It would be a synthetic slavery.
They could easily murder you in your sleep.
They’d be harder to understand than a real woman, who at least responds to chocolate and other bribes.
So you’ll probably be shagging something powerful enough to murder you, naive because she was built yesterday, with a moral sense of disgust, the logical ability to feel ambition (how many hookers want to be hookers) and you restrict from her legal personhood and agency.
Yeah, that is a completely legitimate platform for a robot uprising.
I always wondered watching Terminator why the robots hated humans so much, eventually I figured it must be enslavement, and as anyone with books knows, the most common form was sexual slavery.
On the other hand, simple forms little better than we have now would remove most r-selected people from the gene pool. Only those who wanted a family would have one. It would also mean more women in theory are safe from verbal abuse, explicit catcalling and rape, so I’m on the fence depending on the way the tech goes.
p.s. in religion cheating is bad because it changes the focus from the home, so it still counts. Plus addiction.
“What scares me is that there are moral fashions too. They’re just as arbitrary, and just as invisible to most people. But they’re much more dangerous. Fashion is mistaken for good design; moral fashion is mistaken for good. Dressing oddly gets you laughed at. Violating moral fashions can get you fired, ostracized, imprisoned, or even killed.“
Ideas have fashions too. They have a timeliness and a reactionary component to them.
Useful to anyone beyond the mainstream.